Пост и воздержание от пищи в трактате Исидора Севильского «О церковных службах» (De ecclesiasticis officiis)
This contribution to a volume on the“ultimate why-question” discusses ambiguities in Leibniz’s formulation of the question, “[. . . ] pourquoi il y a plus tôt quelque chose que rien”. This formulation poses two problems: Leibniz does not explain how to understand the concepts of “something” and “nothing”. And it is not clear, whether “something” and “nothing” are contradictory opposites, so that there is either nothing or something, or whether both concepts denote principles which are effective in the world at the same time. My analysis rests on the hypothesis that the relevant context for Leibniz’s question is the theology of creation.
Hence, the paper compares eight different approaches to “creation from nothing” (Thomists, Scotists, Taurellus, Lubinus, Timpler, Keckermann, Kircher, Knorr von Rosenroth, van Helmont). Candidates for the nihil the world was created from include absolute non-being, thoughts in God’s mind, unformed matter, imaginary space, or a self-contraction of the Divine spirit. These different approaches can be translated into different versions of the “ultimate why-question”. The paper concludes that Leibniz’s formulation contains a comparison between two Divine acts of creation, because not only “something”, but “nothing” as well owes its subsistence to the Divine will. This rises substantial questions: either God created first an imperfect entity in order to create the world as a whole, or Leibniz subscribes to an emanative understanding of creation that either levels the difference between creation and (natural) generation or is based on misunderstanding God as a material entity.
The article is devoted to the study of the theological article as a representative of theoretical theological discourse. In the article, the determinants of this kind of discourse are singled out, determinants viewed as its key features enhancing the argumentative effect.
This article is dedicated to the visigothic symphony, incarnated in the last canon of IV council of Toledo, when the Church took a possibility to form an ideology and to influence the reality. TheparticipantsoftheIVcouncilofToledodecreed that a king must be elected by bishops and nobility, and this fact testifies theirs political ambitions. AtonetheChurch (representedby most educated bishops, for example, Isidore of Seville and his disciples) imagines itself as protector of right king. Theparticipantsofcouncil created an ideal of governor, and the real king was obliged to follow it, otherwise he may deprive himself of the Churchs supporting. Butthejustandmerciful king disposed of Churchs defence: and the state criminal, who had encroached upon his life and throne, where anathematized. The ideas, formulated on IV council of Toledo, were developed in the kings code of law (Liber Iudiciorum), promulgated in 654.